Imagens da página
PDF
ePub

Jesus says to Nicodemus, (according to the common English version)" Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God;" and again he says, "Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." It is, I think, obvious that the latter of these sayings is nothing more than an explanatory repetition of the former, and that, in point of meaning, they are to be regarded as equivalent. Now, it appears, from the comparison of the other passages in the writings of this apostle, in which the same adverb is used, that the term rendered born again, although denoting that birth which was in fact a second one, ought rather to be rendered "born from above;" see chap. iii, 31; xix, 11. 23; comp. Matt. xxvii, 51; Mark xv, 38; James i, 17; iii, 15. 17. So Schleusner in lex. It follows, therefore, that to be "born from above" and "to be born of water and the Spirit" are expressions which have the same meaning. But "to be born from above" can surely signify nothing less than to undergo that true regeneration-that real change of heart, which is indeed "from above," because it is effected only by the Spirit and power of the Almighty. Again, after speaking of this heavenly birth "of water and the spirit," our Lord immediately drops his figurative allusion to baptism, and contrasts the moral change, of which alone he is speaking, with the birth of the flesh, "That which is born of the flesh, is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit, is spirit;” ver. 6.

[ocr errors]

When the apostle Paul described the Corinthian Christians as persons who were "washed," "sanctified," and "justified, in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of God," I Cor. vi, 11; and when, on another occasion, he made mention of the whole church as sanctified and cleansed "with the washing of water by the word," Eph. v, 26; he probably derived his

figurative language from the well-known rite of baptism in water; and yet the impartial critick will scarcely deny that the doctrine which he couched under that language related solely to the operations of divine grace. But there is, in the writings of this apostle, another passage, which, while it plainly illustrates our Lord's doctrine respecting a birth " of water and of the Spirit," affords additional information on the subject of true Christian baptism. "For we ourselves also," says the apostle to Titus, "were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another. But, after that, the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost, which he shed on us abundantly, through Jesus Christ our Saviour;" Tit. iii, 3-6. Here, as in John iii, 3-5, there is a very obvious allusion to that outward rite of baptism on conversion, which was understood among both Jews and Christians to be the sign of regeneration or of the second birth: and yet, where is the enlightened Christian who will refuse to allow that, under these figurative expressions, the apostle is promulgating a doctrine entirely spiritual? The "washing of regeneration" which is here distinguished from all our own works of righteousnes, attributed solely to the merciful interposition of God our Saviour, and described as a divine operation, efficacious for the salvation of souls, can surely be nothing else than the baptism of the Spirit, or, to adopt the apostle's own words of added explanation," the renewing of the Holy Ghost."

Another passage, of no very dissimilar import, is found in the epistle to the Hebrews; an epistle which

I deem to be rightly attributed to the same inspired author. "Having, therefore, boldness," says the apostle, " to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; and having an High Priest over the house of God; let us draw near with a true heart, in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water;" chap. x, 19 --22. The "pure water" mentioned in this passage is explained by some criticks as signifying the water of an outward baptism; but a little examination may serve to convince the candid inquirer that such an interpretation is inconsistent with the whole scope of the apostle's argument. Every one who attentively peruses the ninth and tenth chapters of this admirable epistle, will observe that Paul is there unfolding the great principles or doctrines of the Christian dispensation, as they were prefigured by the circumstances of the Jewish ceremonial law. The ritual appointed to be observed on the great day of atonement, as described in Levit. xvi, is that part of the Jewish institution to which he is particularly adverting. On that day, the High Priest was accustomed to enter into the Holy of Holies, or inner sanctuary of the temple, after a careful washing or bathing of his own body. After this purification he offered up a bullock and a goat, as an atonement for sin, and sprinkled the blood of the victims on the mercy-seat and on the altar. These and similar ceremonies (among which he particularly mentions "divers baptisms") are treated on by the apostle as denoting the spiritual realities of the New Covenant; and when he proceeds to describe those realities, it is from the ordinance of Judaism that he borrows his figures. As the mercy-seat and the altar, on the great day of atonement, and the people them

selves on other occasions, were sprinkled with the blood of bulls and of goats, so are the hearts of Christians to be sprinkled from an evil conscience by the blood of Christ; and as the flesh of the priest, of the unclean person, or of the proselyte, was bathed in pure water, so is our body, or natural man, to be cleansed and renewed by the purifying influence of the Holy Ghost. The "sprinkling of the heart" and the "washing of the body" are expressions equally metaphorical. The one denotes our deliverance from guilt; the other, our purification from sin. The one is the application of the sacrifice of Christ; the other is the baptism of his Spirit. So Calvin, Gill, and other Commentators.

Such are the passages in the New Testament which contain indirect allusions to baptism in water, and in which the circumstances of that rite are figuratively adverted to, in descriptions relating exclusively to the work of grace. I shall now proceed to consider certain other passages of the same general import, in which the verb "baptize," or the substantive "baptism," are actually introduced. In the passages already cited, the baptism of the Spirit is represented by its characteristick circumstances. In those to which I am now about to invite the reader's attention, it is called by its name; it is described as a baptism.

The first passages to be adduced, of the description now alluded to, are those which contain the declarations of John, the forerunner of Jesus, respecting the baptism of the Messiah, as contrasted with his own: one of these declarations is recorded by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and the other by the apostle John. "I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance," cried the Baptist to the Pharisees and Sadducees, and to the whole multitude by whom he was surrounded, comp. Luke iii, 16; "but he that

cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire: whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire;" Matt. iii, 11, 12. Luke has recited the Baptist's declaration, in nearly the same words, ch. iii, 16, 17; and Mark records it simply as follows: "John preached, saying, There cometh one mightier than I after me, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose. I indeed have baptized you with water; but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost;" ch. i, 8. The baptism with fire, mentioned in Matt. iii, 11, and Luke iii, 16, is explained by some commentators solely of the punishments to be inflicted by the Son of God on the unbelieving Jews and on the wicked in general. That this expression contains some allusion to punishment, is, in my opinion, in some degree probable from the following verse: but the manner in which it is introduced to notice, in immediate connexion with the baptism of the Holy Ghost, affords strong reason to believe that this fiery baptism represents more particularly the enlightening, inflaming, and purifying operation of the Spirit upon the hearts of men. One thing is described, as Grotius observes on Matt. iii, 11, by two different modes of expression-an observation which derives confirmation from Mark i, 8, in which passage the baptism attributed to Christ is that of the Holy Ghost alone. The other declara

5 Such is the view taken of the "fiery baptism" here mentioned, by many learned and able criticks: for example, Munster, Erasmus, Vatablus, Clarius, Lud. Cappellus, and Calvin. Grotius I have already mentioned; see Critic. Sacr. in loc. An excellent exposition of Matt. iii, 11, will be found in the well-known and justly-valued commentaries of the late Thomas Scott.

« AnteriorContinuar »